August 17, 1998
Pipeline across Cascades not needed
I am writing as a new member of the Columbia Cascade Alliance (CCA). I have recently joined CCA in opposition to Olympic Pipe Line Company's (OPCL's) proposed Cross Cascade Pipeline for the following reasons:
This project must be rejected. Washington residents should call Gary Locke and tell him so.
- Texaco and ARCO (both part owners of OPCL) already refine more fuel than is needed for Washington State. Building the missing pipeline link across the Cascades will ensure that refinery capacity in Western Washington for export will increase, requiring more crude oil, most likely via tankers.
- Eastern Washington has cheaper fuel prices than western Washington. The existing pipelines serving eastern Washington are under capacity. We need to maintain and better utilize the existing pipeline system. A new pipeline is simply not needed.
- Olympic's facts and statements have too often proven to be wrong. For example, a recent article quotes Olympic spokesperson, Darlene Madenwald, claiming that 90 percent of the land in the path of the new pipeline consists of existing right-of-ways, while noting that Susan Harper, ex. director of the Cascade Columbia Alliance claims that more than half of it will be new corridors. Actually, it was a Jones & Stokes EFSEC Application Review of March 31, 1997 (p. 66) that determined that "Most of the route lies within new corridor."
Karen Deal, Seattle